Per Janet Napolitano today. Great news!! Let's get this football season rolling.

Woohoo - great news!

Great news for the entering freshmen especially. NCAA clears FB, WBB, and MBB to practice starting June 1 too.

When exactly? And what does "open" mean? Hybrid classes allow athletes to start practicing? Wilcox has said that it will take at least 6 weeks to be game ready. What about the other P12 teams, including the out of state teams? I'm optimistic, but..Go Bears!

BancroftBear93 said:

---

Woohoo - great news! Sanity prevails.

---

"Sanity prevails" meaning what?
Was it insane to shut down and shelter in place.
Was it insane to say that opening up a the state Would occur when various well thought out standards were met?
The fact that the State is opening up now that those scientific standardS are being met is the culmination of a very logical and sane process.

What is insane is opening up a state without regard for scientific standards and relying on a report prepared by an economist that has projected that new cases of infection would drop to ZERO by May 15. (2020 not 2021).

GivemTheAxe said:

---

BancroftBear93 said:

---

Woohoo - great news! Sanity prevails.

---

"Sanity prevails" meaning what?
Was it insane to shut down and shelter in place.

---

Yes!

Golden One said:

---

GivemTheAxe said:

---

Golden One said:

---

GivemTheAxe said:

---

BancroftBear93 said:

---

Woohoo - great news! Sanity prevails.

---

"Sanity prevails" meaning what?
Was it insane to shut down and shelter in place.

---

Yes!

---

Let me add one more:
It would be insane to take COVID19 medical advice from someone who had no understanding of how pandemics work.

---

True. The governors of New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Illinois certainly fall in that category.

---

I'm guessing you consider yourself an independent thinker.

72CalBear said:

---

When exactly? And what does "open" mean? Hybrid classes allow athletes to start practicing? Wilcox has said that it will take at least 6 weeks to be game ready. What about the other P12 teams, including the out of state teams? I'm optimistic, but..Go Bears!

---

Really have to wonder about the premature Cal State decision.

Very good news, and presumably will come with mitigation measures.

And another big step forward.

wifeisafurd said:

---

72CalBear said:

---

When exactly? And what does "open" mean? Hybrid classes allow athletes to start practicing? Wilcox has said that it will take at least 6 weeks to be game ready. What about the other P12 teams, including the out of state teams? I'm optimistic, but..Go Bears!

---

Really have to wonder about the premature Cal State decision.

Very good news, and presumably will come with mitigation measures.

---

I suspect that when the fall semester begins, both the UC's and the CSU's will look remarkably similar. Both will have adopted the hybrid model, small groups meeting on campus and large groups meeting online.

I'm sorry to be a wet blanket, but there is a *zero* percent chance of college football in the fall. None. In short, four reasons:
(a) universities may be held liable for putting their student-athletes at risk,
(b) 10-15% of student-athletes would likely refuse to play for fear of catching the virus (percentage is a guess based on OCD/anxiety rates),
(c) the absurd logistics of quarantining positive cases (and those who have been in close contact with the infected person...which could be the entire team?). So, for instance, if Will Craig were to test positive for the coronavirus, what would happen? WC would be sidelined for 1-2 months. The entire OL group would be quarantined for 2 weeks (this could be lowered with daily testing, if available). The D line would also have to be quarantined? Other close friends on the team would be quarantined, as well? Do you think Justin Wilcox would put student-athletes in harm's way? Would JW say, "You can play. You only did a few drills with him. The NFL is waiting." or "We need to practice. The virus won't kill you if you catch it. It only kills old people." I don't think so, either.
and (d), Coaches JW, DeRuyter, BM, GA, and the angry/scared parents of the players. What percent of parents would have a conniption if "their boy was out there being exposed to the coronavirus?" Would Wilcoxwho uses the "lower-body injury" descriptor famerisk his players' health? Or more importantly, would the AD and/or the rather anti-athletics admin allow for contact sports to be played when there is a chance of spreading the virus and/or death (and risk the PR nightmare that would follow from "killing one of their own student-athletes" and "putting profits ahead of education/lives")?

Watching the discussion on BI on the pandemic has been eye-opening. Reading the responses from a population of posters (some of whom I had held in some regard over the past 10-15 years) reminds me of "the frog in boiling water" fable. Those posters who think that football is likely appear to me as the frogs slowly boiling in the water of a political/media atmosphere. Please allow me a moment to explain.
I moved to Australia a year ago (for a better academic job), specifically, Western Australia. The state (of 2.5 million) has had three positive cases...this month. Only now are things starting to open ("Step 1" was launched on May 18th). https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-03-17/coronavirus-cases-data-reveals-how-covid-19-spreads-in-australia/12060704 . I, and to a large degree, Cal/Wife Strong! (whose on the east coast somewhere?), live in a place in which it is entirely possible, within a few weeks, to live in a state with zero COVID cases. The (a) absence of a threat of contracting the virus and (b) the absence of the hellscape that is the US media/political complex allows for a different view. I've read posters justify their views based on standards that are not sufficiently stringent to create a safe environment (e.g., "We have had days with fewer than 30 deaths," "It is their own choice if they...," "It only kills old people," "It doesn't kill *that* many more people than the flu."). Step outside the political/media landscape and realize the absurdity of these statements and justificationsparticularly as they relate to playing football.

I know, it hurts. 2020 would have been Cal's best shot at a Rose Bowl in 15 years.

From the outside looking in, here is what is going to happen. If everything holds to pattern, at some point over the summer, stanfurd (spelled correctly with a u *and* lower case) will announce that all Fall sports will be cancelled (or maybe just "contact" sports, I haven't decided yet what I think they'll do). Seven to ten days later, Cal will announce something similar. A week later, the LA schools will follow suit. Again, I'm sorry, it would've been a great season. 2021!

They're gonna play football this year. It will either be empty stadiums or low amount of people, like 8-10k. Sorry to be your wet blanket. People will have to have self determination. If you're going to be out and about..don't go hugging grandma, until you've isolated for awhile.

MinotStateBeav said:

---

They're gonna play football this year. It will either be empty stadiums or low amount of people, like 8-10k. Sorry to be your wet blanket. People will have to have self determination. If you're going to be out and about..don't go hugging grandma, until you've isolated for awhile.

---

And if it is 8-10K fans in stands let the students have as many of those spots as desired. Then the donors.The latter may make so much possible, the former is what it is all about. We can all be patient and stream or watch on TV for one season.

Well, as I've said before, I don't think they will be able to complete a CFB season this year, but I do think there will be some CFB games played this fall. Most teams will simply not test their players until they show symptoms. Those that do test positive will have their results hushed up under the guise of player medical privacy. The financial incentives for teams to behave in this manner are overwhelming. At some point during the season however a positive test result will become public and within a few weeks the season will be over. Over after 3 games? Six? Ten? Hard to say, but it's inconceivable that we can get through November in the thick of flue season.

calwhoyou? said:

---

From the outside looking in, here is what is going to happen. If everything holds to pattern, at some point over the summer, stanfurd (spelled correctly with a u *and* lower case) will announce that all Fall sports will be cancelled (or maybe just "contact" sports, I haven't decided yet what I think they'll do). Seven to ten days later, Cal will announce something similar. A week later, the LA schools will follow suit. Again, I'm sorry, it would've been a great season. 2021!

---

welcome back whovian.

OdontoBear66 said:

---

And if it is 8-10K fans in stands let the students have as many of those spots as desired.

---

yeah-sure, fine, and sell'em lotsa beer. # what could possibly go wrong.

Golden One said:

---

GivemTheAxe said:

---

Golden One said:

---

GivemTheAxe said:

---

BancroftBear93 said:

---

Woohoo - great news! Sanity prevails.

---

"Sanity prevails" meaning what?
Was it insane to shut down and shelter in place.

---

Yes!

---

Let me add one more:
It would be insane to take COVID19 medical advice from someone who had no understanding of how pandemics work.

---

True. The governors of New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Illinois certainly fall in that category.

---

Ohio and Maryland too, or this is just a "shout out" to the Dem Governors?
I go to bed each night thanking the governors of NY, NJ, and Pa. because that's where I and my kids live.
Each of them took advice from people who know a whole lot about pandemics, so I am grateful for that too.

smh said:

---

OdontoBear66 said:

---

And if it is 8-10K fans in stands let the students have as many of those spots as desired.

---

yeah-sure, fine, and sell'em lotsa beer. # what could possibly go wrong.

---

yeah, they'll not drink at all in their residences on campus. What's your point. The game is for us all, but if we have to limit fans in the stands, for me, it is for the students first.

OdontoBear66 said:

---

What's your point. The game is for us all, but if we have to limit fans in the stands, for me, it is for the students first.

---

no doubt, right. unrelated picture from twitter..

Cal84 said:

---

Well, as I've said before, I don't think they will be able to complete a CFB season this year, but I do think there will be some CFB games played this fall. Most teams will simply not test their players until they show symptoms. Those that do test positive will have their results hushed up under the guise of player medical privacy. The financial incentives for teams to behave in this manner are overwhelming. At some point during the season however a positive test result will become public and within a few weeks the season will be over. Over after 3 games? Six? Ten? Hard to say, but it's inconceivable that we can get through November in the thick of flue season.

---

When I go to physical therapy or a doctor now, everyone: staff, patients, doctors, etc. do not get in the building without they temp checked and asked about symptoms. I can't imagine there won't be is similar protocols for players thought out the day. The other side of this is if you look at cases in California, Oregon and Washington (looking at states who seem to have reliable stats) the number of deaths and serous cases for those in the player age group, is ..................... zero. As a player, you have a better chance becoming seriously sick with the seasonal flu. The guys who are at risk are the older coaches, refs, sideline officials and staff. And older fans or very young fans (the New York infant issue), if they even allow fans. But let's get this straight as to what is happening. Absent a second waive in which campuses close, the SEC, Big 12 (and probably the ACC sometime soon) have said publicly they are playing and the Pac has decided internally they will not be left behind, even if that means moving games and practices to different venues. The Power 5 Commissioners went to President and said no open campus, no football. That UC campus will be open says a lot in the decision process for Cal and the Pac 12 (it is huge). It means Oregon and Washington will be under pressure to open campuses. And I do expect some hybrid opening for both campus and football, as '71 suggested. I anticipate those on the virtual call next week with Knowlton and Wilcox will find this out.

As an aside, I wonder what assurances Big Janet got from the local medical officers that they won't interfere with campuses opening?

calwhoyou? said:

---

I'm sorry to be a wet blanket, but there is a *zero* percent chance of college football in the fall. None. In short, four reasons:
(a) universities may be held liable for putting their student-athletes at risk,
(b) 10-15% of student-athletes would likely refuse to play for fear of catching the virus (percentage is a guess based on OCD/anxiety rates),
(c) the absurd logistics of quarantining positive cases (and those who have been in close contact with the infected person...which could be the entire team?). So, for instance, if Will Craig were to test positive for the coronavirus, what would happen? WC would be sidelined for 1-2 months. The entire OL group would be quarantined for 2 weeks (this could be lowered with daily testing, if available). The D line would also have to be quarantined? Other close friends on the team would be quarantined, as well? Do you think Justin Wilcox would put student-athletes in harm's way? Would JW say, "You can play. You only did a few drills with him. The NFL is waiting." or "We need to practice. The virus won't kill you if you catch it. It only kills old people." I don't think so, either.
and (d), Coaches JW, DeRuyter, BM, GA, and the angry/scared parents of the players. What percent of parents would have a conniption if "their boy was out there being exposed to the coronavirus?" Would Wilcoxwho uses the "lower-body injury" descriptor famerisk his players' health? Or more importantly, would the AD and/or the rather anti-athletics admin allow for contact sports to be played when there is a chance of spreading the virus and/or death (and risk the PR nightmare that would follow from "killing one of their own student-athletes" and "putting profits ahead of education/lives")?

Watching the discussion on BI on the pandemic has been eye-opening. Reading the responses from a population of posters (some of whom I had held in some regard over the past 10-15 years) reminds me of "the frog in boiling water" fable. Those posters who think that football is likely appear to me as the frogs slowly boiling in the water of a political/media atmosphere. Please allow me a moment to explain.
I moved to Australia a year ago (for a better academic job), specifically, Western Australia. The state (of 2.5 million) has had three positive cases...this month. Only now are things starting to open ("Step 1" was launched on May 18th). https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-03-17/coronavirus-cases-data-reveals-how-covid-19-spreads-in-australia/12060704 . I, and to a large degree, Cal/Wife Strong! (whose on the east coast somewhere?), live in a place in which it is entirely possible, within a few weeks, to live in a state with zero COVID cases. The (a) absence of a threat of contracting the virus and (b) the absence of the hellscape that is the US media/political complex allows for a different view. I've read posters justify their views based on standards that are not sufficiently stringent to create a safe environment (e.g., "We have had days with fewer than 30 deaths," "It is their own choice if they...," "It only kills old people," "It doesn't kill *that* many more people than the flu."). Step outside the political/media landscape and realize the absurdity of these statements and justificationsparticularly as they relate to playing football.

I know, it hurts. 2020 would have been Cal's best shot at a Rose Bowl in 15 years.

From the outside looking in, here is what is going to happen. If everything holds to pattern, at some point over the summer, stanfurd (spelled correctly with a u *and* lower case) will announce that all Fall sports will be cancelled (or maybe just "contact" sports, I haven't decided yet what I think they'll do). Seven to ten days later, Cal will announce something similar. A week later, the LA schools will follow suit. Again, I'm sorry, it would've been a great season. 2021!

---

And I respectfully think there is zero percent chance we don't have a football season. Luckily we'll get to see who is right shortly. I would bet you but I just spent all of my money buying extra season tickets.

calwhoyou? said:

---

I'm sorry to be a wet blanket, but there is a *zero* percent chance of college football in the fall. None. In short, four reasons:
(a) universities may be held liable for putting their student-athletes at risk,
(b) 10-15% of student-athletes would likely refuse to play for fear of catching the virus (percentage is a guess based on OCD/anxiety rates),
(c) the absurd logistics of quarantining positive cases (and those who have been in close contact with the infected person...which could be the entire team?). So, for instance, if Will Craig were to test positive for the coronavirus, what would happen? WC would be sidelined for 1-2 months. The entire OL group would be quarantined for 2 weeks (this could be lowered with daily testing, if available). The D line would also have to be quarantined? Other close friends on the team would be quarantined, as well? Do you think Justin Wilcox would put student-athletes in harm's way? Would JW say, "You can play. You only did a few drills with him. The NFL is waiting." or "We need to practice. The virus won't kill you if you catch it. It only kills old people." I don't think so, either.
and (d), Coaches JW, DeRuyter, BM, GA, and the angry/scared parents of the players. What percent of parents would have a conniption if "their boy was out there being exposed to the coronavirus?" Would Wilcoxwho uses the "lower-body injury" descriptor famerisk his players' health? Or more importantly, would the AD and/or the rather anti-athletics admin allow for contact sports to be played when there is a chance of spreading the virus and/or death (and risk the PR nightmare that would follow from "killing one of their own student-athletes" and "putting profits ahead of education/lives")?

Watching the discussion on BI on the pandemic has been eye-opening. Reading the responses from a population of posters (some of whom I had held in some regard over the past 10-15 years) reminds me of "the frog in boiling water" fable. Those posters who think that football is likely appear to me as the frogs slowly boiling in the water of a political/media atmosphere. Please allow me a moment to explain.
I moved to Australia a year ago (for a better academic job), specifically, Western Australia. The state (of 2.5 million) has had three positive cases...this month. Only now are things starting to open ("Step 1" was launched on May 18th). https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-03-17/coronavirus-cases-data-reveals-how-covid-19-spreads-in-australia/12060704 . I, and to a large degree, Cal/Wife Strong! (whose on the east coast somewhere?), live in a place in which it is entirely possible, within a few weeks, to live in a state with zero COVID cases. The (a) absence of a threat of contracting the virus and (b) the absence of the hellscape that is the US media/political complex allows for a different view. I've read posters justify their views based on standards that are not sufficiently stringent to create a safe environment (e.g., "We have had days with fewer than 30 deaths," "It is their own choice if they...," "It only kills old people," "It doesn't kill *that* many more people than the flu."). Step outside the political/media landscape and realize the absurdity of these statements and justificationsparticularly as they relate to playing football.

I know, it hurts. 2020 would have been Cal's best shot at a Rose Bowl in 15 years.

From the outside looking in, here is what is going to happen. If everything holds to pattern, at some point over the summer, stanfurd (spelled correctly with a u *and* lower case) will announce that all Fall sports will be cancelled (or maybe just "contact" sports, I haven't decided yet what I think they'll do). Seven to ten days later, Cal will announce something similar. A week later, the LA schools will follow suit. Again, I'm sorry, it would've been a great season. 2021!

---

If Stanfurd cancels their football season, Cal will carry on, citing the cowardice shown by the Tree when they forfeited that Rugby game, citing the fear of injury. It will be our pleasure to remind them of that, incessantly.

Sebastabear said:

---

calwhoyou? said:

---

I'm sorry to be a wet blanket, but there is a *zero* percent chance of college football in the fall. None. In short, four reasons:
(a) universities may be held liable for putting their student-athletes at risk,
(b) 10-15% of student-athletes would likely refuse to play for fear of catching the virus (percentage is a guess based on OCD/anxiety rates),
(c) the absurd logistics of quarantining positive cases (and those who have been in close contact with the infected person...which could be the entire team?). So, for instance, if Will Craig were to test positive for the coronavirus, what would happen? WC would be sidelined for 1-2 months. The entire OL group would be quarantined for 2 weeks (this could be lowered with daily testing, if available). The D line would also have to be quarantined? Other close friends on the team would be quarantined, as well? Do you think Justin Wilcox would put student-athletes in harm's way? Would JW say, "You can play. You only did a few drills with him. The NFL is waiting." or "We need to practice. The virus won't kill you if you catch it. It only kills old people." I don't think so, either.
and (d), Coaches JW, DeRuyter, BM, GA, and the angry/scared parents of the players. What percent of parents would have a conniption if "their boy was out there being exposed to the coronavirus?" Would Wilcoxwho uses the "lower-body injury" descriptor famerisk his players' health? Or more importantly, would the AD and/or the rather anti-athletics admin allow for contact sports to be played when there is a chance of spreading the virus and/or death (and risk the PR nightmare that would follow from "killing one of their own student-athletes" and "putting profits ahead of education/lives")?

Watching the discussion on BI on the pandemic has been eye-opening. Reading the responses from a population of posters (some of whom I had held in some regard over the past 10-15 years) reminds me of "the frog in boiling water" fable. Those posters who think that football is likely appear to me as the frogs slowly boiling in the water of a political/media atmosphere. Please allow me a moment to explain.
I moved to Australia a year ago (for a better academic job), specifically, Western Australia. The state (of 2.5 million) has had three positive cases...this month. Only now are things starting to open ("Step 1" was launched on May 18th). https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-03-17/coronavirus-cases-data-reveals-how-covid-19-spreads-in-australia/12060704 . I, and to a large degree, Cal/Wife Strong! (whose on the east coast somewhere?), live in a place in which it is entirely possible, within a few weeks, to live in a state with zero COVID cases. The (a) absence of a threat of contracting the virus and (b) the absence of the hellscape that is the US media/political complex allows for a different view. I've read posters justify their views based on standards that are not sufficiently stringent to create a safe environment (e.g., "We have had days with fewer than 30 deaths," "It is their own choice if they...," "It only kills old people," "It doesn't kill *that* many more people than the flu."). Step outside the political/media landscape and realize the absurdity of these statements and justificationsparticularly as they relate to playing football.

I know, it hurts. 2020 would have been Cal's best shot at a Rose Bowl in 15 years.

From the outside looking in, here is what is going to happen. If everything holds to pattern, at some point over the summer, stanfurd (spelled correctly with a u *and* lower case) will announce that all Fall sports will be cancelled (or maybe just "contact" sports, I haven't decided yet what I think they'll do). Seven to ten days later, Cal will announce something similar. A week later, the LA schools will follow suit. Again, I'm sorry, it would've been a great season. 2021!

---

And I respectfully think there is zero percent chance we don't have a football season. Luckily we'll get to see who is right shortly. I would bet you but I just spent all of my money buying extra season tickets.

---

I agree. I think it's virtually certain at this point that we will have a football season, and it will probably begin on schedule.

Rushinbear said:

---

calwhoyou? said:

---

I'm sorry to be a wet blanket, but there is a *zero* percent chance of college football in the fall. None. In short, four reasons:
(a) universities may be held liable for putting their student-athletes at risk,
(b) 10-15% of student-athletes would likely refuse to play for fear of catching the virus (percentage is a guess based on OCD/anxiety rates),
(c) the absurd logistics of quarantining positive cases (and those who have been in close contact with the infected person...which could be the entire team?). So, for instance, if Will Craig were to test positive for the coronavirus, what would happen? WC would be sidelined for 1-2 months. The entire OL group would be quarantined for 2 weeks (this could be lowered with daily testing, if available). The D line would also have to be quarantined? Other close friends on the team would be quarantined, as well? Do you think Justin Wilcox would put student-athletes in harm's way? Would JW say, "You can play. You only did a few drills with him. The NFL is waiting." or "We need to practice. The virus won't kill you if you catch it. It only kills old people." I don't think so, either.
and (d), Coaches JW, DeRuyter, BM, GA, and the angry/scared parents of the players. What percent of parents would have a conniption if "their boy was out there being exposed to the coronavirus?" Would Wilcoxwho uses the "lower-body injury" descriptor famerisk his players' health? Or more importantly, would the AD and/or the rather anti-athletics admin allow for contact sports to be played when there is a chance of spreading the virus and/or death (and risk the PR nightmare that would follow from "killing one of their own student-athletes" and "putting profits ahead of education/lives")?

Watching the discussion on BI on the pandemic has been eye-opening. Reading the responses from a population of posters (some of whom I had held in some regard over the past 10-15 years) reminds me of "the frog in boiling water" fable. Those posters who think that football is likely appear to me as the frogs slowly boiling in the water of a political/media atmosphere. Please allow me a moment to explain.
I moved to Australia a year ago (for a better academic job), specifically, Western Australia. The state (of 2.5 million) has had three positive cases...this month. Only now are things starting to open ("Step 1" was launched on May 18th). https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-03-17/coronavirus-cases-data-reveals-how-covid-19-spreads-in-australia/12060704 . I, and to a large degree, Cal/Wife Strong! (whose on the east coast somewhere?), live in a place in which it is entirely possible, within a few weeks, to live in a state with zero COVID cases. The (a) absence of a threat of contracting the virus and (b) the absence of the hellscape that is the US media/political complex allows for a different view. I've read posters justify their views based on standards that are not sufficiently stringent to create a safe environment (e.g., "We have had days with fewer than 30 deaths," "It is their own choice if they...," "It only kills old people," "It doesn't kill *that* many more people than the flu."). Step outside the political/media landscape and realize the absurdity of these statements and justificationsparticularly as they relate to playing football.

I know, it hurts. 2020 would have been Cal's best shot at a Rose Bowl in 15 years.

From the outside looking in, here is what is going to happen. If everything holds to pattern, at some point over the summer, stanfurd (spelled correctly with a u *and* lower case) will announce that all Fall sports will be cancelled (or maybe just "contact" sports, I haven't decided yet what I think they'll do). Seven to ten days later, Cal will announce something similar. A week later, the LA schools will follow suit. Again, I'm sorry, it would've been a great season. 2021!

---

If Stanfurd cancels their football season, Cal will carry on, citing the cowardice shown by the Tree when they forfeited that Rugby game, citing the fear of injury. It will be our pleasure to remind them of that, incessantly.

---

They are not cancelling absent a second waive.

calwhoyou? said:

---

I'm sorry to be a wet blanket, but there is a *zero* percent chance of college football in the fall. None. In short, four reasons:
(a) universities may be held liable for putting their student-athletes at risk,
(b) 10-15% of student-athletes would likely refuse to play for fear of catching the virus (percentage is a guess based on OCD/anxiety rates),
(c) the absurd logistics of quarantining positive cases (and those who have been in close contact with the infected person...which could be the entire team?). So, for instance, if Will Craig were to test positive for the coronavirus, what would happen? WC would be sidelined for 1-2 months. The entire OL group would be quarantined for 2 weeks (this could be lowered with daily testing, if available). The D line would also have to be quarantined? Other close friends on the team would be quarantined, as well? Do you think Justin Wilcox would put student-athletes in harm's way? Would JW say, "You can play. You only did a few drills with him. The NFL is waiting." or "We need to practice. The virus won't kill you if you catch it. It only kills old people." I don't think so, either.
and (d), Coaches JW, DeRuyter, BM, GA, and the angry/scared parents of the players. What percent of parents would have a conniption if "their boy was out there being exposed to the coronavirus?" Would Wilcoxwho uses the "lower-body injury" descriptor famerisk his players' health? Or more importantly, would the AD and/or the rather anti-athletics admin allow for contact sports to be played when there is a chance of spreading the virus and/or death (and risk the PR nightmare that would follow from "killing one of their own student-athletes" and "putting profits ahead of education/lives")?

Watching the discussion on BI on the pandemic has been eye-opening. Reading the responses from a population of posters (some of whom I had held in some regard over the past 10-15 years) reminds me of "the frog in boiling water" fable. Those posters who think that football is likely appear to me as the frogs slowly boiling in the water of a political/media atmosphere. Please allow me a moment to explain.
I moved to Australia a year ago (for a better academic job), specifically, Western Australia. The state (of 2.5 million) has had three positive cases...this month. Only now are things starting to open ("Step 1" was launched on May 18th). https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-03-17/coronavirus-cases-data-reveals-how-covid-19-spreads-in-australia/12060704 . I, and to a large degree, Cal/Wife Strong! (whose on the east coast somewhere?), live in a place in which it is entirely possible, within a few weeks, to live in a state with zero COVID cases. The (a) absence of a threat of contracting the virus and (b) the absence of the hellscape that is the US media/political complex allows for a different view. I've read posters justify their views based on standards that are not sufficiently stringent to create a safe environment (e.g., "We have had days with fewer than 30 deaths," "It is their own choice if they...," "It only kills old people," "It doesn't kill *that* many more people than the flu."). Step outside the political/media landscape and realize the absurdity of these statements and justificationsparticularly as they relate to playing football.

I know, it hurts. 2020 would have been Cal's best shot at a Rose Bowl in 15 years.

From the outside looking in, here is what is going to happen. If everything holds to pattern, at some point over the summer, stanfurd (spelled correctly with a u *and* lower case) will announce that all Fall sports will be cancelled (or maybe just "contact" sports, I haven't decided yet what I think they'll do). Seven to ten days later, Cal will announce something similar. A week later, the LA schools will follow suit. Again, I'm sorry, it would've been a great season. 2021!

---

As with just about everything in life, simply follow the dollars. There WILL be a football season in 2020.

smh said:

---

OdontoBear66 said:

---

What's your point. The game is for us all, but if we have to limit fans in the stands, for me, it is for the students first.

---

no doubt, right. unrelated picture from twitter..

---

This is an incredibly representative and symbolic picture of the current "scientific" "social distancing" mindset. Adults being reduced to using oversized baby walkers so that they don't hurt themselves...

calwhoyou? said:

---

I'm sorry to be a wet blanket, but there is a *zero* percent chance of college football in the fall. None. In short, four reasons:
(a) universities may be held liable for putting their student-athletes at risk,
(b) 10-15% of student-athletes would likely refuse to play for fear of catching the virus (percentage is a guess based on OCD/anxiety rates),
(c) the absurd logistics of quarantining positive cases (and those who have been in close contact with the infected person...which could be the entire team?). So, for instance, if Will Craig were to test positive for the coronavirus, what would happen? WC would be sidelined for 1-2 months. The entire OL group would be quarantined for 2 weeks (this could be lowered with daily testing, if available). The D line would also have to be quarantined? Other close friends on the team would be quarantined, as well? Do you think Justin Wilcox would put student-athletes in harm's way? Would JW say, "You can play. You only did a few drills with him. The NFL is waiting." or "We need to practice. The virus won't kill you if you catch it. It only kills old people." I don't think so, either.
and (d), Coaches JW, DeRuyter, BM, GA, and the angry/scared parents of the players. What percent of parents would have a conniption if "their boy was out there being exposed to the coronavirus?" Would Wilcoxwho uses the "lower-body injury" descriptor famerisk his players' health? Or more importantly, would the AD and/or the rather anti-athletics admin allow for contact sports to be played when there is a chance of spreading the virus and/or death (and risk the PR nightmare that would follow from "killing one of their own student-athletes" and "putting profits ahead of education/lives")?

Watching the discussion on BI on the pandemic has been eye-opening. Reading the responses from a population of posters (some of whom I had held in some regard over the past 10-15 years) reminds me of "the frog in boiling water" fable. Those posters who think that football is likely appear to me as the frogs slowly boiling in the water of a political/media atmosphere. Please allow me a moment to explain.
I moved to Australia a year ago (for a better academic job), specifically, Western Australia. The state (of 2.5 million) has had three positive cases...this month. Only now are things starting to open ("Step 1" was launched on May 18th). https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-03-17/coronavirus-cases-data-reveals-how-covid-19-spreads-in-australia/12060704 . I, and to a large degree, Cal/Wife Strong! (whose on the east coast somewhere?), live in a place in which it is entirely possible, within a few weeks, to live in a state with zero COVID cases. The (a) absence of a threat of contracting the virus and (b) the absence of the hellscape that is the US media/political complex allows for a different view. I've read posters justify their views based on standards that are not sufficiently stringent to create a safe environment (e.g., "We have had days with fewer than 30 deaths," "It is their own choice if they...," "It only kills old people," "It doesn't kill *that* many more people than the flu."). Step outside the political/media landscape and realize the absurdity of these statements and justificationsparticularly as they relate to playing football.

I know, it hurts. 2020 would have been Cal's best shot at a Rose Bowl in 15 years.

From the outside looking in, here is what is going to happen. If everything holds to pattern, at some point over the summer, stanfurd (spelled correctly with a u *and* lower case) will announce that all Fall sports will be cancelled (or maybe just "contact" sports, I haven't decided yet what I think they'll do). Seven to ten days later, Cal will announce something similar. A week later, the LA schools will follow suit. Again, I'm sorry, it would've been a great season. 2021!

---

I have been very cautious on COVID and getting back to normal. To be honest, at this point I care very little about football. Having a college age kid, I want her to have as much normalcy as reasonably possible and be as safe as reasonably possible.

When I looked at the CDC data last week, there had been 48 deaths nationwide from Covid in the 15-24 age bracket and 41 deaths from the flu. That simply does not justify draconian protections for that age group. I hate when people compare Covid to the flu, because for most of us it isn't comparable. But for that age group it is. There are reasonable measures that can be taken.

I am very open to being convinced that my thinking is wrong on this, and we have to be more cautious, but we have to base decisions on data, and from what I've seen the data supports protecting coaches and officials as much as possible, but that this is a reasonably safe activity for students.

StillABear1 said:

---

Per Janet Napolitano today. Great news!! Let's get this football season rolling.

---

Honestly, Napolitano didn't say anything that campuses weren't already saying for weeks.

wifeisafurd said:

---

Cal84 said:

---

Well, as I've said before, I don't think they will be able to complete a CFB season this year, but I do think there will be some CFB games played this fall. Most teams will simply not test their players until they show symptoms. Those that do test positive will have their results hushed up under the guise of player medical privacy. The financial incentives for teams to behave in this manner are overwhelming. At some point during the season however a positive test result will become public and within a few weeks the season will be over. Over after 3 games? Six? Ten? Hard to say, but it's inconceivable that we can get through November in the thick of flue season.

---

When I go to physical therapy or a doctor now, everyone: staff, patients, doctors, etc. do not get in the building without they temp checked and asked about symptoms. I can't imagine there won't be is similar protocols for players thought out the day. The other side of this is if you look at cases in California, Oregon and Washington (looking at states who seem to have reliable stats) the number of deaths and serous cases for those in the player age group, is ..................... zero. As a player, you have a better chance becoming seriously sick with the seasonal flu. The guys who are at risk are the older coaches, refs, sideline officials and staff. And older fans or very young fans (the New York infant issue), if they even allow fans. But let's get this straight as to what is happening. Absent a second waive in which campuses close, the SEC, Big 12 (and probably the ACC sometime soon) have said publicly they are playing and the Pac has decided internally they will not be left behind, even if that means moving games and practices to different venues. The Power 5 Commissioners went to President and said no open campus, no football. That UC campus will be open says a lot in the decision process for Cal and the Pac 12 (it is huge). It means Oregon and Washington will be under pressure to open campuses. And I do expect some hybrid opening for both campus and football, as '71 suggested. I anticipate those on the virtual call next week with Knowlton and Wilcox will find this out.

As an aside, I wonder what assurances Big Janet got from the local medical officers that they won't interfere with campuses opening?

---

Social pressure will sway local medical officers to comply. Most of the time like in Nevada, these people are primarily careerist bureaucrats first, and scientists (of varying competence) second.

Sports and college football are a very powerful social tool. In this case it is a positive influence in terms of forcing the hand of overbearing governors and local bureaucrats in WA and OR. In Europe the German Bundesliga is forcing neighboring countries to move faster towards restoring normalcy.

Based on what we have learned so far from SARS-CoV-2 and from past epidemics, it is better and safer for society at large to reopen schools and colleges in order to build herd immunity using the least vulnerable segments of society, while protecting the most vulnerable. This is one thing people freaking out about fraternity parties or students frolicking on a Florida beach don't get, these guys are our ticket against a potential second wave. You want them to get out and mix now, at the tail end of the epidemic curve, in order to stave off and minimize the likelihood of a winter season rebound.

calwhoyou? said:

---

I'm sorry to be a wet blanket, but there is a *zero* percent chance of college football in the fall. None. In short, four reasons:
(a) universities may be held liable for putting their student-athletes at risk,
(b) 10-15% of student-athletes would likely refuse to play for fear of catching the virus (percentage is a guess based on OCD/anxiety rates),
(c) the absurd logistics of quarantining positive cases (and those who have been in close contact with the infected person...which could be the entire team?). So, for instance, if Will Craig were to test positive for the coronavirus, what would happen? WC would be sidelined for 1-2 months. The entire OL group would be quarantined for 2 weeks (this could be lowered with daily testing, if available). The D line would also have to be quarantined? Other close friends on the team would be quarantined, as well? Do you think Justin Wilcox would put student-athletes in harm's way? Would JW say, "You can play. You only did a few drills with him. The NFL is waiting." or "We need to practice. The virus won't kill you if you catch it. It only kills old people." I don't think so, either.
and (d), Coaches JW, DeRuyter, BM, GA, and the angry/scared parents of the players. What percent of parents would have a conniption if "their boy was out there being exposed to the coronavirus?" Would Wilcoxwho uses the "lower-body injury" descriptor famerisk his players' health? Or more importantly, would the AD and/or the rather anti-athletics admin allow for contact sports to be played when there is a chance of spreading the virus and/or death (and risk the PR nightmare that would follow from "killing one of their own student-athletes" and "putting profits ahead of education/lives")?

Watching the discussion on BI on the pandemic has been eye-opening. Reading the responses from a population of posters (some of whom I had held in some regard over the past 10-15 years) reminds me of "the frog in boiling water" fable. Those posters who think that football is likely appear to me as the frogs slowly boiling in the water of a political/media atmosphere. Please allow me a moment to explain.
I moved to Australia a year ago (for a better academic job), specifically, Western Australia. The state (of 2.5 million) has had three positive cases...this month. Only now are things starting to open ("Step 1" was launched on May 18th). https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-03-17/coronavirus-cases-data-reveals-how-covid-19-spreads-in-australia/12060704 . I, and to a large degree, Cal/Wife Strong! (whose on the east coast somewhere?), live in a place in which it is entirely possible, within a few weeks, to live in a state with zero COVID cases. The (a) absence of a threat of contracting the virus and (b) the absence of the hellscape that is the US media/political complex allows for a different view. I've read posters justify their views based on standards that are not sufficiently stringent to create a safe environment (e.g., "We have had days with fewer than 30 deaths," "It is their own choice if they...," "It only kills old people," "It doesn't kill *that* many more people than the flu."). Step outside the political/media landscape and realize the absurdity of these statements and justificationsparticularly as they relate to playing football.

I know, it hurts. 2020 would have been Cal's best shot at a Rose Bowl in 15 years.

From the outside looking in, here is what is going to happen. If everything holds to pattern, at some point over the summer, stanfurd (spelled correctly with a u *and* lower case) will announce that all Fall sports will be cancelled (or maybe just "contact" sports, I haven't decided yet what I think they'll do). Seven to ten days later, Cal will announce something similar. A week later, the LA schools will follow suit. Again, I'm sorry, it would've been a great season. 2021!

---

Wrong. Student athletes want to play.

And Vegas disagrees.,,

Odds on When 2020 College Football Season Will Start
Date Odds
On or Before Sept. 4th +250
After Sept. 4th -360

Cal88 said:

---

Based on what we have learned so far from SARS-CoV-2 and from past epidemics, it is better and safer for society at large to reopen schools and colleges in order to build herd immunity using the least vulnerable segments of society, while protecting the most vulnerable.

---

Cal88 am I wrong or have you massively changed your perspective on COVID in the last few months?

OaktownBear said:

---

calwhoyou? said:

---

I'm sorry to be a wet blanket, but there is a *zero* percent chance of college football in the fall. None. In short, four reasons:
(a) universities may be held liable for putting their student-athletes at risk,
(b) 10-15% of student-athletes would likely refuse to play for fear of catching the virus (percentage is a guess based on OCD/anxiety rates),
(c) the absurd logistics of quarantining positive cases (and those who have been in close contact with the infected person...which could be the entire team?). So, for instance, if Will Craig were to test positive for the coronavirus, what would happen? WC would be sidelined for 1-2 months. The entire OL group would be quarantined for 2 weeks (this could be lowered with daily testing, if available). The D line would also have to be quarantined? Other close friends on the team would be quarantined, as well? Do you think Justin Wilcox would put student-athletes in harm's way? Would JW say, "You can play. You only did a few drills with him. The NFL is waiting." or "We need to practice. The virus won't kill you if you catch it. It only kills old people." I don't think so, either.
and (d), Coaches JW, DeRuyter, BM, GA, and the angry/scared parents of the players. What percent of parents would have a conniption if "their boy was out there being exposed to the coronavirus?" Would Wilcoxwho uses the "lower-body injury" descriptor famerisk his players' health? Or more importantly, would the AD and/or the rather anti-athletics admin allow for contact sports to be played when there is a chance of spreading the virus and/or death (and risk the PR nightmare that would follow from "killing one of their own student-athletes" and "putting profits ahead of education/lives")?

Watching the discussion on BI on the pandemic has been eye-opening. Reading the responses from a population of posters (some of whom I had held in some regard over the past 10-15 years) reminds me of "the frog in boiling water" fable. Those posters who think that football is likely appear to me as the frogs slowly boiling in the water of a political/media atmosphere. Please allow me a moment to explain.
I moved to Australia a year ago (for a better academic job), specifically, Western Australia. The state (of 2.5 million) has had three positive cases...this month. Only now are things starting to open ("Step 1" was launched on May 18th). https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-03-17/coronavirus-cases-data-reveals-how-covid-19-spreads-in-australia/12060704 . I, and to a large degree, Cal/Wife Strong! (whose on the east coast somewhere?), live in a place in which it is entirely possible, within a few weeks, to live in a state with zero COVID cases. The (a) absence of a threat of contracting the virus and (b) the absence of the hellscape that is the US media/political complex allows for a different view. I've read posters justify their views based on standards that are not sufficiently stringent to create a safe environment (e.g., "We have had days with fewer than 30 deaths," "It is their own choice if they...," "It only kills old people," "It doesn't kill *that* many more people than the flu."). Step outside the political/media landscape and realize the absurdity of these statements and justificationsparticularly as they relate to playing football.

I know, it hurts. 2020 would have been Cal's best shot at a Rose Bowl in 15 years.

From the outside looking in, here is what is going to happen. If everything holds to pattern, at some point over the summer, stanfurd (spelled correctly with a u *and* lower case) will announce that all Fall sports will be cancelled (or maybe just "contact" sports, I haven't decided yet what I think they'll do). Seven to ten days later, Cal will announce something similar. A week later, the LA schools will follow suit. Again, I'm sorry, it would've been a great season. 2021!

---

I have been very cautious on COVID and getting back to normal. To be honest, at this point I care very little about football. Having a college age kid, I want her to have as much normalcy as reasonably possible and be as safe as reasonably possible.

When I looked at the CDC data last week, there had been 48 deaths nationwide from Covid in the 15-24 age bracket and 41 deaths from the flu. That simply does not justify draconian protections for that age group. I hate when people compare Covid to the flu, because for most of us it isn't comparable. But for that age group it is. There are reasonable measures that can be taken.

I am very open to being convinced that my thinking is wrong on this, and we have to be more cautious, but we have to base decisions on data, and from what I've seen the data supports protecting coaches and officials as much as possible, but that this is a reasonably safe activity for students.

---

I too have been very cautious with COVID, as I should be at my old age. But our grandson, who starts Cal in the fall, does not need that degree of caution. The numbers you cite may somewhat indicate that ones in that age group should get it, get done with it, develop antibodies to same all while enjoying their ISO with the disease on a college campus.
My concern would be with the profs and admins if of a certain age. Will that be equivalent of incubating them in a nursing home? I do not know.

Cal88 said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

Cal84 said:

---

Well, as I've said before, I don't think they will be able to complete a CFB season this year, but I do think there will be some CFB games played this fall. Most teams will simply not test their players until they show symptoms. Those that do test positive will have their results hushed up under the guise of player medical privacy. The financial incentives for teams to behave in this manner are overwhelming. At some point during the season however a positive test result will become public and within a few weeks the season will be over. Over after 3 games? Six? Ten? Hard to say, but it's inconceivable that we can get through November in the thick of flue season.

---

When I go to physical therapy or a doctor now, everyone: staff, patients, doctors, etc. do not get in the building without they temp checked and asked about symptoms. I can't imagine there won't be is similar protocols for players thought out the day. The other side of this is if you look at cases in California, Oregon and Washington (looking at states who seem to have reliable stats) the number of deaths and serous cases for those in the player age group, is ..................... zero. As a player, you have a better chance becoming seriously sick with the seasonal flu. The guys who are at risk are the older coaches, refs, sideline officials and staff. And older fans or very young fans (the New York infant issue), if they even allow fans. But let's get this straight as to what is happening. Absent a second waive in which campuses close, the SEC, Big 12 (and probably the ACC sometime soon) have said publicly they are playing and the Pac has decided internally they will not be left behind, even if that means moving games and practices to different venues. The Power 5 Commissioners went to President and said no open campus, no football. That UC campus will be open says a lot in the decision process for Cal and the Pac 12 (it is huge). It means Oregon and Washington will be under pressure to open campuses. And I do expect some hybrid opening for both campus and football, as '71 suggested. I anticipate those on the virtual call next week with Knowlton and Wilcox will find this out.

As an aside, I wonder what assurances Big Janet got from the local medical officers that they won't interfere with campuses opening?

---

Social pressure will sway local medical officers to comply. Most of the time like in Nevada, these people are primarily careerist bureaucrats first, and scientists (of varying competence) second.

Sports and college football are a very powerful social tool. In this case it is a positive influence in terms of forcing the hand of overbearing governors and local bureaucrats in WA and OR. In Europe the German Bundesliga is forcing neighboring countries to move faster towards restoring normalcy.

Based on what we have learned so far from SARS-CoV-2 and from past epidemics, it is better and safer for society at large to reopen schools and colleges in order to build herd immunity using the least vulnerable segments of society, while protecting the most vulnerable. This is one thing people freaking out about fraternity parties or students frolicking on a Florida beach don't get, these guys are our ticket against a potential second wave. You want them to get out and mix now, at the tail end of the epidemic curve, in order to stave off and minimize the likelihood of a winter season rebound.

---

Like it or not, that is what is happening in a good portion of the nation. Most states likely will be in what Newsom describes as Phase 4 through out the summer, hopefully subject to certain protections like wearing mask in public. And that could include California for many counties from what Newsom suggested. Whether we build herd immunity in this country remains to be seen. I understand the logic, but I have not heard there is evidence yet that herd immunity works with respect to this virus.

I also think Oak makes a good point. At some point you have to say I'm not going to damage several generations of younger people who do not appear to be anywhere need unreasoanble risk, and destroy their economic future (I added this) just because people in institutional settings or old farts (at 62 I feel qualified to say this) are more at risk. I need to make decisions to avoid situations where I'm at risk, hopefully there are mitigation measure such as masks until there is a vaccine or herd immunity (if either is possible) or until the virus wanes, and people in in cluster situations need to be isolated when COVID returns. We have a much better understanding of what works, who is at risk, how to measure COVID, etc. Let's use our knowledge to save the younger generations from educational and economic hardship. The class fo 2021 needs to be able to graduate and face a world with opportunities.

Sebastabear said:

---

calwhoyou? said:

---

I'm sorry to be a wet blanket, but there is a *zero* percent chance of college football in the fall. None. In short, four reasons:
(a) universities may be held liable for putting their student-athletes at risk,
(b) 10-15% of student-athletes would likely refuse to play for fear of catching the virus (percentage is a guess based on OCD/anxiety rates),
(c) the absurd logistics of quarantining positive cases (and those who have been in close contact with the infected person...which could be the entire team?). So, for instance, if Will Craig were to test positive for the coronavirus, what would happen? WC would be sidelined for 1-2 months. The entire OL group would be quarantined for 2 weeks (this could be lowered with daily testing, if available). The D line would also have to be quarantined? Other close friends on the team would be quarantined, as well? Do you think Justin Wilcox would put student-athletes in harm's way? Would JW say, "You can play. You only did a few drills with him. The NFL is waiting." or "We need to practice. The virus won't kill you if you catch it. It only kills old people." I don't think so, either.
and (d), Coaches JW, DeRuyter, BM, GA, and the angry/scared parents of the players. What percent of parents would have a conniption if "their boy was out there being exposed to the coronavirus?" Would Wilcoxwho uses the "lower-body injury" descriptor famerisk his players' health? Or more importantly, would the AD and/or the rather anti-athletics admin allow for contact sports to be played when there is a chance of spreading the virus and/or death (and risk the PR nightmare that would follow from "killing one of their own student-athletes" and "putting profits ahead of education/lives")?

Watching the discussion on BI on the pandemic has been eye-opening. Reading the responses from a population of posters (some of whom I had held in some regard over the past 10-15 years) reminds me of "the frog in boiling water" fable. Those posters who think that football is likely appear to me as the frogs slowly boiling in the water of a political/media atmosphere. Please allow me a moment to explain.
I moved to Australia a year ago (for a better academic job), specifically, Western Australia. The state (of 2.5 million) has had three positive cases...this month. Only now are things starting to open ("Step 1" was launched on May 18th). https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-03-17/coronavirus-cases-data-reveals-how-covid-19-spreads-in-australia/12060704 . I, and to a large degree, Cal/Wife Strong! (whose on the east coast somewhere?), live in a place in which it is entirely possible, within a few weeks, to live in a state with zero COVID cases. The (a) absence of a threat of contracting the virus and (b) the absence of the hellscape that is the US media/political complex allows for a different view. I've read posters justify their views based on standards that are not sufficiently stringent to create a safe environment (e.g., "We have had days with fewer than 30 deaths," "It is their own choice if they...," "It only kills old people," "It doesn't kill *that* many more people than the flu."). Step outside the political/media landscape and realize the absurdity of these statements and justificationsparticularly as they relate to playing football.

I know, it hurts. 2020 would have been Cal's best shot at a Rose Bowl in 15 years.

From the outside looking in, here is what is going to happen. If everything holds to pattern, at some point over the summer, stanfurd (spelled correctly with a u *and* lower case) will announce that all Fall sports will be cancelled (or maybe just "contact" sports, I haven't decided yet what I think they'll do). Seven to ten days later, Cal will announce something similar. A week later, the LA schools will follow suit. Again, I'm sorry, it would've been a great season. 2021!

---

And I respectfully think there is zero percent chance we don't have a football season. Luckily we'll get to see who is right shortly. I would bet you but I just spent all of my money buying extra season tickets.

---

Actually, we won't ever get to see who is right, we'll only get absolute proof that one of you is definitely wrong. But the truth is that regardless of the outcome, both of you are definitely wrong. The chances of having a football season aren't zero. The chances of not having a football season are not zero.

None of us knows exactly what the chances really are, and when we see whether or not there is a football season, we still won't know what the chances were as of today. Personally, I peg the chances of having a football season at 83.21%. How's that for a number to pull out of my rear? You might peg them at 99%, maybe 99.99%. Someone else might peg them at 1%. We'll never be able to prove who's right. Is my 83.21% estimate too optimistic or too pessimistic? If the football season doesn't happen, it doesn't mean my 83.21% guess was wrong.

At halftime of the 2018 Cal-SC football game, my friend said we have a zero percent chance of winning. I said 2%. ESPN gametracker said 7%. I know my friend was wrong, I knew it at the time, and Cal's victory proved without a doubt he was wrong. But who was closer to right, me or gametracker? Just because Cal won doesn't mean we'll ever know. I might have thought it was one in 50, but I was saying there's a chance, at at least I was right about that. And there's a chance of no season. If my friend had said at halftime we had a one in 10,000 chance of winning, we'd never be able to prove he was wrong, but zero? Definitely wrong.

Given the current trajectory we are on, I believe the chances of a season are really close to 100%. But the chances that circumstances change sufficiently such that we don't have a football season are definitely not zero.

I appreciate your optimism, however. If you'd said at halftime of 2018 Cal-SC that we had a 38% chance of winning, I'd have thought you were crazy, but I would have appreciated the optimism, and I appreciate your optimism here, even if zero isn't the right number for the chances of no season.

If this forum has revealed anything over the years it's the monumental confidence of the rabble. We know everything. And we know it better than the rubes so stupid to dedicate their lives to it. Let's do cold fusion next.